How about if I wanted a wagon but settled for a CUV in ‘99 and only buy cars once every decade or so???

My replacement vehicle will have a tailgate too – either a hatchback or a wagon… Way too versatile compared to a small sedan.

I agree with you that the Flex is the answer to an unasked question, but not the Edge. Yes, they are both 5 seaters, but the Escape is technically a mini-ute, and the Edge is a true crossover and argueably they appeal to two different customers. Unlike the Flex, the Edge (including its varients) is apparantly selling in decent numbers so it must have at least some appeal.

Really? When was that?

1) Richard was not fired because the Flex was a failure.
The head count reduction numbers had to be achieved. He was let go because he had the lowest seniority of all of the Ford design chiefs…Not the lowest performance.
The complexities of a large corporation are staggering including the legal aspects. Separations (firings) must be done the most legal way possible or you open a company up to lawsuits.
Richard was a Design Chief…Not senior management. The styling direction is dictated by senior management. The Design Chiefs execute the direction.

2) They did not stop production of the Flex. It is made in Ontario with the Edge. They simply canceled the 3rd shift.

At 55 mph, the Flex needs only 8.90 horsepower while the nearest competitors in the full-size crossover segment – the GMC Acadia and Toyota Highlander – require more than 9.30 horsepower. Moreover, the Flex’s coefficient of drag is significantly better than all of its Asian competitors. Flex tests at 0.355 coefficient of drag while the competitors are at 0.375.

You actually believe what you read in a Ford press release? And how often do people drive at 55MPH?

And do you know what the Cd of the Chevy Traverse is? Nope, you’re wrong. It is .33…which is a MUCH better number than .355.

The Ford Fairway?

At least Ford will sell a few, more than can be said for the Pontiac G8. That car has to be the poster child for bad timing. I know GM didn’t spend near as much as Ford did but if there any on the water right now the boats should be turned around. If Australia is GM’s answer to the future, they have none.

IMHO regarding the Flex
1. Styling – Frugly! My 18 year old son pointed out to me that the white roof option really makes it look like the world’s largest golf cart.
2. Weight – makes an Edge look svelte.
3. Mileage – You can’t tell me the drivetrain from an Escape Hybrid would not fit – should have been standard as this thing is easily as weird looking as a Prius. Would have changed instanlty from something you are ashamed to drive into a tree-huggers dream – the anti-Hummer.
2. Name – Almost anything but Flex (OK, Edge is almost as bad)- My vote would have been Country Squire. Why hide the fact that it is a station wagon? Maybe that’s the next retro-trend. Used to be Ford occasianly was out front.

Maybe as a Mercury exclusive the price would have seemed more appropriate and they might have actually sold more. Don’t laugh, a Crossover saved Buick.

Less dramatic but similarly sized & priced (but shovel-nosed = less frontal area) is the 2008 Honda Odyssey VCM, Cd of 0.30 and EPA rating of 17/25. Apples to oranges? the Flex is just another big people carrier which replaced another one, the Freestar/Windstar.

And how are said competitors selling? .355 is not a drag coefficient to brag about.

Compared to the competition, Ford Flex moves through the air with surprising ease. The Flex’s aerodynamics equates to one mile per gallon improvement in fuel economy.

At 55 mph, the Flex needs only 8.90 horsepower while the nearest competitors in the full-size crossover segment – the GMC Acadia and Toyota Highlander – require more than 9.30 horsepower. Moreover, the Flex’s coefficient of drag is significantly better than all of its Asian competitors. Flex tests at 0.355 coefficient of drag while the competitors are at 0.375.

For what it is, it is actually a very nice car.

Design is polarizing, yes, but I like it, partially because of that.

The interior is very well designed and had good quality materials, definitely better than Honda Odyssey or Honda Pilot.

Fuel economy is on par with other vehicles of this size.

I might still buy it but I am not sure if we need _two_ 7 seaters (we already have a Mazda CX-9).

The problem with the Flex is that it competes with minivans and does so reasonably well, but these days even your usual minivan shoppers do some hard thinking as to whether they REALLY need a minivan for two adults and two kids.

Plus, of course, with all the negative news, many people stop looking at domestics altogether.

And of course the fuel economy. How could a 4600lb box have good fuel economy? So for an AWD version you’re saving a few mpg over an SUV but you can’t tow with it and it has none of the absolutely essential off road capability or drive right over the car in front of you road clearance.

You sir, are a very smart person. I have the EXACT same thoughts on the Flex and T-X. The baboons at FMC would much rather spend hundreds of millions of dollars designing a stretched Scion, than spend ONE RED CENT on advertising the Taurus X. Not that they really gave the Taurus X a chance…it came out as a 2008 model and less than a year they have a (much worse) replacement for it. There is NOTHING that the stupid Flex does that the Taurus X can’t. In fact, the T-X has more total cargo room than the Flex…according to http://www.ford.com. The Flex is another answer to a question nobody asked. Much like the Edge. Why does Ford need a 5-seat SUV…when they already have one called Escape?

I hope beyond hope that Ford loses TONS of money on the Flex experiment. Maybe then, the baboons will realize that there are better ways of doing business.

Something about brand identity according to a walking waste of space and air in dearborn- A woman whose head was stuck permanently up the dark and smelly place justified this by making the comment “What kind of person buys a car named Camry?”

Regarding the Flex- Pure corporate arrogance ignoring all feedback about the Fairlane name. That and its pure early-mid 80s’ GM box ugly. Shades of the Chevy Celebrity wagon.

Not the first time thats happened, is it? When Ford ruined the Taurus by making it look like a rolling mutant fish, removing content and raising the price- Dealers complained to the insular citadel of ignorance in Dearborn that people were walking in, seeing the window sticker and leaving knowing that they could get an Accord or Camry for the same money or less with much more content and what was Ford’s answer? “No, they’re not.”

The “500″ was a tired design before it even hit the road. Take a look at the Audi 100 from 1983. Look familiar?

Design by committee. Guaranteed to produce a hot steamy diaper load every time.

A great wagon/crossover based on the Fusion platform would be a much better fit for today’s market. The Flex is too big, too expensive and has a horrible name.

Magnum – questionable build quality, and poorly designed access to the storage area. An impractical wagon, hence it’s demise.

Legacy – I do not fit.

Avant – Outrageous pricing, too many firsthand reports of spotty Audi quality and service lately.

There, now I can go back to whining :)

“it has none of the absolutely essential off road capability”

sorry forgot to add /sarcasm.

Oh, like the Freestyle, since that was such a big hit??

It’s way too early to be second-guessing the Flex or declaring it dead. Every review I’ve read has been very positive. This is not a DOA product like Chrysler has been putting out the past few years, this actually has a chance to gain sales through word of mouth.

Gas prices have hurt all SUV/crossover sales, but this thing is ultimately going to live or die by its polarizing styling.

Most of the SUVs sold in the past have never been taken off road, nor used to tow. FWD combined with traction control/stability control is more than enough to handle almost any road condition as long as you don’t make a habit of driving through deep mud or unplowed streets during the middle of a blizzard. The FWD model is going to sell in greater numbers than the AWD, and the fuel economy of that one is pretty decent compared with the competition (that being minivans and other full size CUVs).

As far as towing goes, the Flex can handle 4500 lbs, which is enough for a U-Haul, a medium size boat, a trailer with a couple jet-skis/snowmobiles/ATVs, or just about any other load most people would be likely to hitch up. Is it going to tow a horse trailer? No way, but then again, people needing to tow the big stuff will buy a full size true SUV or a truck.

I think there are a few issues with the Flex. For one, I’ve never seen a commercial for it. I’ve seen that stupid “MPG” Toyota commercial a billion and a half times today. “Here we go, here we go, yeah!” Where is the marketing support? The only reason the other 7 seat CUV based on the D3 platform Ford has isn’t selling is because nobody knows it exists. They should have just dumped 1/3 the money they put into producing the Flex into marketing the Taurus X and giving it a not comically bad name. It would have achieved more volume than the Flex and Taurus X combined.

For another, the design is too over the top for a vehicle aimed at minivan expats, IMHO.

And of course the fuel economy. How could a 4600lb box have good fuel economy? So for an AWD version you’re saving a few mpg over an SUV but you can’t tow with it and it has none of the absolutely essential off road capability or drive right over the car in front of you road clearance.